OT?: 'Why is Cal swimming tyrant Teri McKeever still employed?' - SFGate

8,398 Views | 99 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by calumnus
prospeCt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/cal-swimming-coach-teri-mckeever-17625224.php





Chapman_is_Gone
How long do you want to ignore this user?

As of right now, this is the #1 story on the front page of SFGate.com

ColoradoBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
McKeever seems to have a lawyer who's good at PR:

https://www.ocregister.com/2022/11/30/supporters-of-suspended-cal-swim-coach-teri-mckeever-write-letters-on-her-behalf

Comments on this site are, well, interesting (but mostly anonymous):
https://swimswam.com/48-teri-mckeever-supporters-pen-letters-to-cal-in-support-of-suspended-coach/

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No supporting letter from Natalie?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
OdontoBear66
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If the charges are as stipulated she should be a lot more than fired.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
CannonBlast
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is the funniest line from one of the letter writers addressing Knowlton:
"You only have to lose 1 football game at Cal for people to want you to get fired."

Give us more credit. Try 3 consecutive losing seasons and an embarrassing basketball team.
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

That's huge liability for Knowlton and Cal for being on notice of an allegation of a potentially serious violation of policy, and doing nothing about it.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KoreAmBear said:

DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

That's huge liability for Knowlton and Cal for being on notice of an allegation of a potentially serious violation of policy, and doing nothing about it.


Sounds like definitely a violation of university policy, possibly a violation of state and Federal law.
79 Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NM
GoCal80
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

How could it possibly be known whether he reported the allegations? All such reporting and investigating is done confidentially. The reporting person is prohibited from commenting on the case. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, it seems like some big assumptions are being made about what Knowlton did or did not do. Moreover, once a report of such a nature is made, the reporting individual is required to stay clear from engaging with the involved individuals or commenting on the case in any way that could potentially prejudice the outcome of the investigation. In my many years working on campus I have served both as a person reporting such allegations to the appropriate campus offices and have been appointed to committees to investigate allegations.
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

KoreAmBear said:

DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

That's huge liability for Knowlton and Cal for being on notice of an allegation of a potentially serious violation of policy, and doing nothing about it.
Sounds like definitely a violation of university policy, possibly a violation of state and Federal law.
But Knowlton gave the parents a solid "Go Bears!" That makes everything okay, doesn't it?
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GoCal80 said:

DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

How could it possibly be known whether he reported the allegations? All such reporting and investigating is done confidentially. The reporting person is prohibited from commenting on the case. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, it seems like some big assumptions are being made about what Knowlton did or did not do. Moreover, once a report of such a nature is made, the reporting individual is required to stay clear from engaging with the involved individuals or commenting on the case in any way that could potentially prejudice the outcome of the investigation. In my many years working on campus I have served both as a person reporting such allegations to the appropriate campus offices and have been appointed to committees to investigate allegations.
We cannot know. But the parent reports would very likely be different. We would be hearing things like "Knowlton told us he would report it immediately but nothing happened with the investigation." We wouldn't be hearing reports that Knowlton dismissed the reports.
Chapman_is_Gone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

KoreAmBear said:

DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

That's huge liability for Knowlton and Cal for being on notice of an allegation of a potentially serious violation of policy, and doing nothing about it.


Sounds like definitely a violation of university policy, possibly a violation of state and Federal law.

I know for a fact that Knowlton crossed state lines, so some sort of federal trafficking charges should apply as well. Am I right? (My legal knowledge stems from Dukes of Hazzard).

C'mon Feds!

socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Disagree. This is so common on harassment cases. Reporter is strongly encouraged to say nothing up to an including why you are not saying anything. The deep pocket here is the university and hr is in the business of risk management.

This isn't to defend jk but rather that the parents reaction as reported in a newspaper should be treated as not determine evidence of jk's idiocy. For that I give you the mark fox extension
Take care of your Chicken
socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I hate her lawyer.
Take care of your Chicken
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

I hate her lawyer.


Yup.
She's a "victim" because she's a female coach.
It's gender discrimination.
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

But Knowlton gave the parents a solid "Go Bears!" That makes everything okay, doesn't it?


The guy cant "read" a room to save his own life.
He's terribly tone-deaf.
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
bipolarbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

Fired. For. Cause.
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

Disagree. This is so common on harassment cases. Reporter is strongly encouraged to say nothing up to an including why you are not saying anything. The deep pocket here is the university and hr is in the business of risk management.

This isn't to defend jk but rather that the parents reaction as reported in a newspaper should be treated as not determine evidence of jk's idiocy. For that I give you the mark fox extension
Maybe that is a university policy, I don't know. I am pretty familiar with SafeSport and I do not recall it is a requirement there. It's completely normal to tell someone you are a mandatory reporter and that's the next step. People ALWAYS want to know what's going to be done about their issue. SafeSport tells us never to take sides, never tell someone you are going to do "something" about it…telling them it's a mandatory report situation is a very common and normal answer because it allows you to stay neutral
DavisBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Everything just seems to be related to a weakness at the top of the department. Knowlton seems at best to be clueless to what's going on in the swimming program (despite being told) and at worst did nothing to address it. It is clear that he is just way in over his head and not competent enough to handle the job. Hopefully Chancellor Christ can use the swimming debacle and the Fox basketball extension as reasons to fire him with cause. These are only the deficiencies that we know about, I'm sure there are plenty more. The athletic department is a dumpster fire.
RichyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?



BY JAMES SUTHERLAND 79
December 01st, 2022College, News, Pac-12


A number of former swimmers, ex-college coaches and various members of the swimming community have spoken out in support of Teri McKeever.

A total of 48 people have written letters supporting McKeever, according to a report Wednesday from The Orange County Register, which have been sent by her attorney, Thomas Newkirk, to the University of California's counsel as part of a campaign coordinated by Newkirk to show support for McKeever.

McKeever was placed on administrative leave by the university in May after allegations of verbal and emotional abuse from a number of her current and former swimmers surfaced.

Over the past several months, more than 40 current or former Cal swimmers and divers, 17 parents, a former member of the men's swimming and diving squad at Cal, two former coaches, a former Cal administrator, and two former Cal athletic department employees have come forward to the SCNG with stories of McKeever's bullying.

Among the most noteworthy supports of McKeever is Alicia Wilson, a current fifth-year senior on the Cal women's team who entered the NCAA transfer portal earlier this season and is not competing with the Golden Bears this weekend at the Minnesota Invite.

"It has been so distressing to have my coach, my idol, and a mother figure taken away so quickly and wrongfully targeted by girls I used to call my teammates and friends," Wilson wrote in a letter addressed to Cal Director of Athletics Jim Knowlton, according to The OC Register.

Wilson's was one of 17 letters provided to a Southern California News Group (SCNG) by Newkirk, which reportedly includes more former swimmers, ex-college coaches, parents of former Golden Bears and various members of the swimming community McKeever has encountered over her 29-year career leading Cal.

According to The OC Register, supporters portray McKeever as a "groundbreaking coach who is the victim of gender bias and of athletes who don't want to be held accountable for their shortcomings in the pool."

The supporters also include Jill Sterkel, a four-time Olympic medalist and longtime college coach who said she agrees with the idea that McKeever is a victim of gender bias.

"I absolutely subscribe to that," Sterkel said. "I was a female coach for a long time. I got the crap beat out of me too. People just (were) talking because I was a female. Assumptions that were made that were completely false, And it's hard, it's hard. You're out there completely by yourself. You're almost on an island."

Newkirk said the letters undercut the allegations made against McKeever and expose what he and supporters have characterized as "a pampered generation of female college athletes and a double standard in how female and male coaches are viewed and judged," according to the OC Register.

"It is a trend for a handful of disgruntled student-athletes to complain about a coach and accuse the culture of being toxic, when in reality, the other 90 percent are perfectly happy," former Purdue head coach Cathy Wright-Eger wrote, according to The OC Register.

"Unfortunately, the small handful, along with their parents and unprofessional reporters are being louder and ruining the careers of many coaches. It is happening every day in collegiate athletics and I would be devastated to see this happen to Teri McKeever."

Another former female coach in the NCAA, Princeton's Susan Teeter, also expressed strong support for McKeever.

"As a women's coach, I have seen years of immature athletes who take on the role of 'mean girls' and become toxic and hateful, which is what I believe you have on your hands right now," said Teeter, who coached at the NCAA Division I level for 45 years.

"This generation of athletes seems to think if they don't get their way, they will create a way to deal with whoever stands in their way. Not only athletes, but many of our male colleagues who are jealous about Teri's success and ability to coach women to the Olympics, when they, as coaches, can't seem to get the job done."

The OC Register notes that 15 of the 17 letters provided to the SCNG were addressed directly to Knowlton, though Newkirk sent them to the university's counsel.

Cal assistant vice chancellor Dan Mogulof told The OC Register Knowlton has not received any such letters, and that the school has "no comment regarding information or correspondence sent to our legal counsel office."

In August, letters supporting McKeever were sent to Cal Berkeley chancellor Carol Christ alleging that university leadership failed to take action on repeated and credible allegations of abuse and bullying against McKeever. The letters suggested that an investigation into Cal leadership rather than McKeever was the more pressing issue. At the time a legal expert told SwimSwam it's not unusual for this type of investigation to focus on whether the individual in question committed wrongdoing before addressing any administrative oversight.

According to The OC Register, McKeever signed a contract extension in January 2020 that expires on April 30, 2024. It includes an annual base salary of $242,000 with up to $55,000 in potential bonuses.

Cal has hired an independent law firm to investigate McKeever, which is still ongoing.

Dave Durden, now in his 16th season as the head coach of the Cal men's swim & dive program, was named acting director of the women's team in August.

The letters reportedly "echo a conspiracy" from some that Durden had designs on McKeever's job for years and is somehow behind the controversy, The OC Register notes.

"I am glad you are doing a thorough review of the program," Mike Stromberg, a Colorado Springs swim coach, wrote in a letter to Knowlton. "I also think you should do the same thorough review of the men's program too."


So let's dismiss the 27 swimmers including Olympians who walked out of practice after meeting with McKeever regarding verbal abuse allegations in late May 2022.. Let's dismiss the allegation by a swimmer, Danielle Carter who confided in McKeever about suicidal thoughts that McKeever "literally laughed in my face" when informed.. Or the countless bullying allegations, targeting swimmers to bully or bullying swimmers to practice with injuries.. Let's dismiss it all….
These testimonials by her peers are nothing more than an attempt to smokescreen the truth via moral accounts of good deeds and ritcheous behavior, all while minimizing/rationalizing abusive behavior by McKeever as if it was the pitiful swimmer's weak character that was the culprit..
She was abusive, it was dismissed… Read more


tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The 48 letters are a smoke screen. This isn't a math equation where more good deeds outweigh less bad deeds. Certain behaviors are unacceptable. Always and no matter what. And it only takes one bad action.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GoCal80 said:

DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

How could it possibly be known whether he reported the allegations? All such reporting and investigating is done confidentially. The reporting person is prohibited from commenting on the case. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, it seems like some big assumptions are being made about what Knowlton did or did not do. Moreover, once a report of such a nature is made, the reporting individual is required to stay clear from engaging with the involved individuals or commenting on the case in any way that could potentially prejudice the outcome of the investigation. In my many years working on campus I have served both as a person reporting such allegations to the appropriate campus offices and have been appointed to committees to investigate allegations.


Nice try.

When the abuse was reported to him Knowlton told the swimmers McKeever was just "a tough coach" and that "one day they would look back and be grateful for (the abuse). Knowlton then gave McKeeever a huge 5 year contract.

If Knowlton had reported the abuse and allegations of racial harassment, there would have been an investigation, the swimmers would have been interviewed by someone at the university. How could there be "an investigation" without the alleged victims knowing about it? That is just an absurd suggestion.

How could McKeever's huge new contract be approved if she was under an internal investigation for violating university, state and federal rules and law?

Knowlton/the university clearly did nothing until after it came out in the press and became a national story earlier this year, after the new contract was signed. That is when they suspended McKeever (with full pay) and hired a high priced outside law firm to do an "investigation."

In any case, no matter what happens next, Knowlton's actions and inactions are going again to cost the university $millions in attorney fees and payouts to some combination of McKeever and the swimmers and possibly even Federal fines.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

The 48 letters are a smoke screen. This isn't a math equation where more good deeds outweigh less bad deeds. Certain behaviors are unacceptable. Always and no matter what. And it only takes one bad action.


Especially all the letters of support from McKeever's friends, other coaches who have no idea what actually happened.

It is important to note that the picture that has been painted of McKeever and her program is more typical of a cult leader. Start by "bonding" revealing your inner most secrets and fears. The cut leader later uses that information against them.

The cult leader has favorites and those "in the dog house" set aside for abuse. This is used for control of the whole group. Initially someone "different" (in this case a different race, different body type is targeted, but definitely anyone who questions the cult leader. No one wants to trade places with the scapegoat by standing up to the cult leader. The others are encouraged to join in the abuse to make them complicit. They are praised. They excel and win external praise, win races. Some come to see the cult leader as a parental figure (in fact many parents run their families this way). They are extremely loyal and would do anything for the leader. They were likely complicit in the abuse and believe the victims "deserved it." The same thing can be scaled up to control countries. Authoritarians do this because it works and they are often greatly rewarded for it, at least in the short run. Authoritarianism always fails in the long run.
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quick correction re something posted above. A linked article referenced SafeSport. I looked it up - SafeSport does not have jurisdiction over NCAA sports, just Olympic sports. So ignore my reference to SafeSport procedures relative to Knowlton, they are irrelevant as applied to Cal.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

KoreAmBear said:

DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

That's huge liability for Knowlton and Cal for being on notice of an allegation of a potentially serious violation of policy, and doing nothing about it.


Sounds like definitely a violation of university policy, possibly a violation of state and Federal law.
Time for the swimmers to lawyer up and file a class action lawsuit against the University. That should get the attention of Knowlton and Christ and possibly get them charged.
socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am not saying that is not how it happened but will point out that conversation is how it was summarized by a reporter as related by pissed off parents. None of us yet know whether or not jk said no such thing and immediately called hr the moment the door closed. Let's wait for the report.
Take care of your Chicken
socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My comment that prompted thay was much more on general hr practice. Every Trai ing I have gone to for 30 years underscores, take notes, ask clarifying questions, say nothing and call hr asap.
Take care of your Chicken
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bipolarbear said:

DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

Fired. For. Cause.

Yup. It's crazy to bemoan that we are saddled with Knowlton for 7 more years when this opportunity is sitting right here in front of us. How often do we get a chance to follow a course that would please various disparate campus groups like this?

Knowlton's biggest strength is that he is a good shmoozer, compared to his predecessor, but as we have found out, that ain't good enough.
BearGoggles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:



Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.



Where is this sourced from? Not disagreeing it could be fireable if true, but how do we know what knowlton did or didn't do at this point?
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

I am not saying that is not how it happened but will point out that conversation is how it was summarized by a reporter as related by pissed off parents. None of us yet know whether or not jk said no such thing and immediately called hr the moment the door closed. Let's wait for the report.


We know he gave McKeever a huge new five year contract AFTER the accusations of racism and abuse were reported to him.

socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

socaltownie said:

I am not saying that is not how it happened but will point out that conversation is how it was summarized by a reporter as related by pissed off parents. None of us yet know whether or not jk said no such thing and immediately called hr the moment the door closed. Let's wait for the report.


We know he gave McKeever a huge new five year contract AFTER the accusations of racism and abuse were reported to him.




I haven't taken the time to layout a timeline.. I can not recall when the first meeting with the parents occurred and when the contract?
Take care of your Chicken
BearGoggles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

calumnus said:

socaltownie said:

I am not saying that is not how it happened but will point out that conversation is how it was summarized by a reporter as related by pissed off parents. None of us yet know whether or not jk said no such thing and immediately called hr the moment the door closed. Let's wait for the report.


We know he gave McKeever a huge new five year contract AFTER the accusations of racism and abuse were reported to him.




I haven't taken the time to layout a timeline.. I can not recall when the first meeting with the parents occurred and when the contract?
Timeline is not entirely clear, but this article lays it out somewhat.

https://www.ocregister.com/2022/08/03/cal-continued-to-give-teri-mckeever-pay-raises-despite-bullying-complaints/

Contract dated/signed Jan 7 2020. Parents brought the most recent allegations in December 2019 and Knowlton apparently was not at that meeting (though Simon-O'Neill was).

The reason I say not entirely clear is that if the contract was signed in January 2020, I think it likely was approved before then (Dec. 2019) and then went through the typical months'
long Cal process.

I think it is very much an open question as to how Knowlton handled the current allegations and how the prior allegations (many of which predate Knowlton's tenure) were handled by Cal, as well as when Knowlton learned of the current/prior allegations. It is possible in my mind that: (i) Simon-O'Neill didn't share the Dec 2019 allegations with Knowlton before the contract was signed; and/or (ii) if he did know, Knowlton followed the current Cal policies with respect to the Dec 2019 allegations (referral to the appropriate third parties, etc.) and proceeded with the contract that had been agreed to in principal before then. Will be very interested in hearing what Simon-O'Neill did in reporting up and how the holiday's potentially interceded (i.e., Cal would be shut down in late December).
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GoCal80 said:

DiabloWags said:

A number of swimmers reportedly made their concerns known to Jim Knowlton in early 2022.

Whether they are true or not, was not up for Knowlton to decide. By law, he must report them.

Doesnt sound like Knowlton did anything.

Thats a fireable offense right there.

How could it possibly be known whether he reported the allegations? All such reporting and investigating is done confidentially. The reporting person is prohibited from commenting on the case. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, it seems like some big assumptions are being made about what Knowlton did or did not do. Moreover, once a report of such a nature is made, the reporting individual is required to stay clear from engaging with the involved individuals or commenting on the case in any way that could potentially prejudice the outcome of the investigation. In my many years working on campus I have served both as a person reporting such allegations to the appropriate campus offices and have been appointed to committees to investigate allegations.
I'll take a stab at this. I work for UC school and I understand what you are saying but somehow we know the coach was put on administrative leave in May and an investigation began. So, if there were complaints in January, why wasn't she put on leave then? I have personal background in this matter and people are usually put on paid administrative leave immediately. They can then be removed to unpaid administrative leave and/or fired later. Or they can be exonerated later. But almost always a person is put on paid leave within weeks.
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.